Jump to content

2019 #4 Prospect: Ryan Mountcastle - LF/1B


Tony-OH

Recommended Posts

It sounds very good to me, assuming he can play a position as adequately as Mancini plays 1B, where I still think Mancini could be very good if given a full season of reps over there. 

I expect that position will be LF at the expense of Stewart, who is interesting but less of an impact bat with less of an arm. I like Santander in RF for now until the arrival of Diaz, if that happens. A Davis release would help find the room for all of these guys and we'll just have to wait and see on that. 

I know folks can take or leave Mancini sometimes on the board, but a lineup with the following guys in 2021 is starting to look pretty competitive:

Mancini
Mountcastle
Santander/Stewart
Hays
Rutschman
Diaz? 

Supplement that with some half-decent pitching and I think you have at least a .500 squad with the potential for more. Middle Infield is the biggest hole, other than obviously SP. 
 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Philip said:

A better Trey Mancini sounds great, but is that enough to put him  at #4? I had him behind Baumann because Baumann offers potential that is more difficult to find( but I’ll certainly defer to you guys)

Yes. It is. I like Baumann lots, but he's down the list some from my belief. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still not thrilled about Mountcastle.  That said, I understand why some are and the increased walk rate he's shown towards the end of last year gives me some hope.  Also, if he's one guy in a lineup that doesn't have a patient approach/on base skills, that's not such a huge deal.  It's a lineup full of those guys that's annoying.

At this point, I'd just like to say I'm really pleased with the type of talent we've got at the top of the list.  Too many times over the years I feel like we've been trying to talk ourselves into guys that we probably - if we're being truthful with ourselves - know won't pan out or don't have a high ceiling and wouldn't be in the Top 5 ranking of a Top 10 ranked team. 

With AR, Gray-Rod, Hall, and even Mountcastle I feel like we've got 4 guys that any franchise would appreciate, even the top ranked systems.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I'm still not thrilled about Mountcastle.  That said, I understand why some are and the increased walk rate he's shown towards the end of last year gives me some hope.  Also, if he's one guy in a lineup that doesn't have a patient approach/on base skills, that's not such a huge deal.  It's a lineup full of those guys that's annoying.

At this point, I'd just like to say I'm really pleased with the type of talent we've got at the top of the list.  Too many times over the years I feel like we've been trying to talk ourselves into guys that we probably - if we're being truthful with ourselves - know won't pan out or don't have a high ceiling and wouldn't be in the Top 5 ranking of a Top 10 ranked team. 

With AR, Gray-Rod, Hall, and even Mountcastle I feel like we've got 4 guys that any franchise would appreciate, even the top ranked systems.  

Definitely. And AR really helps the whole top look much better. If it's just Gray Rod up there it feels like Bundy or Gausman all over again. It's nice to have someone push everyone down a slot. And whoever we pick next is going to be be a top 5 guy as well. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I'm still not thrilled about Mountcastle.  That said, I understand why some are and the increased walk rate he's shown towards the end of last year gives me some hope.  Also, if he's one guy in a lineup that doesn't have a patient approach/on base skills, that's not such a huge deal.  It's a lineup full of those guys that's annoying.

At this point, I'd just like to say I'm really pleased with the type of talent we've got at the top of the list.  Too many times over the years I feel like we've been trying to talk ourselves into guys that we probably - if we're being truthful with ourselves - know won't pan out or don't have a high ceiling and wouldn't be in the Top 5 ranking of a Top 10 ranked team. 

With AR, Gray-Rod, Hall, and even Mountcastle I feel like we've got 4 guys that any franchise would appreciate, even the top ranked systems.  

You are so gonna turn around on Mountcastle. He'll rake.  Nelly Cruz doesn't really play outfield. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very nice report on Mountcastle.   I’m really looking forward to seeing him this year.    “Better version of Mancini” sounds good to me!    I’m a big fan of Trey’s bat and approach at the plate.    The more like him, the merrier, at least when we’re batting.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mentioned this in the trade bait post but seems better posted here. I doubt that Trey has much trade value, but I’m pretty sure Elias will wait till the magical service time date comes, and then he will move Mancini for whatever so as to make room for Mountcastle. If he’s a better version of Trey, as well as younger and cheaper, we can live with a weak throwing arm.

Sadly interesting that discussing Trey/Mc ignores Davis. Ridiculous to get rid of Trey while Davis still occupies a spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Moose Milligan said:

I'm still not thrilled about Mountcastle.  That said, I understand why some are and the increased walk rate he's shown towards the end of last year gives me some hope.  Also, if he's one guy in a lineup that doesn't have a patient approach/on base skills, that's not such a huge deal.  It's a lineup full of those guys that's annoying.

At this point, I'd just like to say I'm really pleased with the type of talent we've got at the top of the list.  Too many times over the years I feel like we've been trying to talk ourselves into guys that we probably - if we're being truthful with ourselves - know won't pan out or don't have a high ceiling and wouldn't be in the Top 5 ranking of a Top 10 ranked team. 

With AR, Gray-Rod, Hall, and even Mountcastle I feel like we've got 4 guys that any franchise would appreciate, even the top ranked systems.  

In my mind, if I'm grouping guys into talent level and ability to be impact players, the top four are in a group by themselves. It's not that the next guys don't have potential, but from here on out we get to guys with solid every day regulars as ceilings (nothing wrong with that) or middle-back to the rotation guys. I do think this top-4 may be the best four the Orioles have had since I've been doing these lists. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Philip said:

I mentioned this in the trade bait post but seems better posted here. I doubt that Trey has much trade value, but I’m pretty sure Elias will wait till the magical service time date comes, and then he will move Mancini for whatever so as to make room for Mountcastle. If he’s a better version of Trey, as well as younger and cheaper, we can live with a weak throwing arm.

Sadly interesting that discussing Trey/Mc ignores Davis. Ridiculous to get rid of Trey while Davis still occupies a spot.

I think Trey probably has decent trade value now, and will have lots of trade value if he puts up numbers similar to this year’s in the first half of 2020.   In my mind, we wouldn’t be trading Trey to “get rid of” him, but to bring back some valuable assets that complement the younger talent now coming up through our system.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

In my mind, if I'm grouping guys into talent level and ability to be impact players, the top four are in a group by themselves. It's not the next guys don't have potential, but from here on out we get to guys with solid every day regulars as ceilings (nothing wrong with that) or middle-back to the rotation guys. I do think this top-4 may be the best four the Orioles have had since I've been doing these lists. 

I'm hoping Diaz puts it together and makes it a Top 5. Probably a long shot, but we'll just have to wait and see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • dWAR is just the run value for defense added with the defensive adjustment.  Corner OF spots have a -7.5 run adjustment, while CF has a +2.5 adjustment over 150 games.    Since Cowser played both CF and the corners they pro-rate his time at each to calculate his defensive adjustment. 
    • Just to be clear, though, fWAR also includes a substantial adjustment for position, including a negative one for Cowser.  For a clearer example on that front, as the chart posted higher on this page indicates, Carlos Santana had a +14 OAA — which is the source data that fWAR’s defensive component is based on. That 14 outs above average equates to 11-12 (they use different values on this for some reason) runs better than the average 1B.  So does Santana have a 12.0 defensive value, per fWAR? He does not. That’s because they adjust his defensive value downward to reflect that he’s playing a less difficult/valuable position. In this case, that adjustment comes out to -11.0 runs, as you can see here:   So despite apparently having a bona fide Gold Glove season, Santana’s Fielding Runs value (FanGraphs’ equivalent to dWAR) is barely above average, at 1.1 runs.    Any good WAR calculation is going to adjust for position. Being a good 1B just isn’t worth as much as being an average SS or catcher. Just as being a good LF isn’t worth as much as being an average CF. Every outfielder can play LF — only the best outfielders can play CF.  Where the nuance/context shows up here is with Cowser’s unique situation. Playing LF in OPACY, with all that ground to cover, is not the same as playing LF at Fenway or Yankee Stadium. Treating Cowser’s “position” as equivalent to Tyler O’Neill’s, for example, is not fair. The degree of difficulty is much, much higher at OPACY’s LF, and so the adjustment seems out of whack for him. That’s the one place where I’d say the bWAR value is “unfair” to Cowser.
    • Wait a second here, the reason he's -0.1 in bb-ref dwar is because they're using drs to track his defensive run value.  He's worth 6.6 runs in defense according to fangraphs, which includes adjustments for position, which would give him a fangraphs defensive war of +0.7.
    • A little funny to have provided descriptions of the hits (“weak” single; “500 foot” HR). FIP doesn’t care about any of that either, so it’s kind of an odd thing to add in an effort to make ERA look bad.  Come in, strike out the first hitter, then give up three 108 MPH rocket doubles off the wall. FIP thinks you were absolutely outstanding, and it’s a shame your pathetic defense and/or sheer bad luck let you down. Next time you’ll (probably) get the outcomes you deserve. They’re both flawed. So is xFIP. So is SIERA. So is RA/9. So is WPA. So is xERA. None of them are perfect measures of how a pitcher’s actual performance was, because there’s way too much context and too many variables for any one metric to really encompass.  But when I’m thinking about awards, for me at least, it ends up having to be about the actual outcomes. I don’t really care what a hitter’s xWOBA is when I’m thinking about MVP, and the same is true for pitchers. Did you get the outs? Did the runs score? That’s the “value” that translates to the scoreboard and, ultimately, to the standings. So I think the B-R side of it is more sensible for awards.  I definitely take into account the types of factors that you (and other pitching fWAR advocates) reference as flaws. So if a guy plays in front of a particular bad defense or had a particularly high percentage of inherited runners score, I’d absolutely adjust my take to incorporate that info. And I also 100% go to Fangraphs first when I’m trying to figure out which pitchers we should acquire (i.e., for forward looking purposes).  But I just can’t bring myself say that my Cy Young is just whichever guy had the best ratio of Ks to BBs to HRs over a threshold number of innings. As @Frobby said, it just distills out too much of what actually happened.
    • We were all a lot younger in 2005.  No one wanted to believe Canseco cause he’s a smarmy guy. Like I said, he was the only one telling the truth. It wasn’t a leap of faith to see McGwire up there and Sosa up there and think “yeah, those guys were juicing” but then suddenly look at Raffy and think he was completely innocent.  It’s a sad story. The guy should be in Hall of Fame yet 500 homers and 3,000 hits are gone like a fart in the wind cause his legacy is wagging his finger and thinking he couldn’t get caught.  Don’t fly too close to the sun.  
    • I think if we get the fun sprinkler loving Gunnar that was in the dugout yesterday, I don’t think we have to worry about him pressing. He seemed loose and feeling good with the other guys he was with, like Kremer.
    • I was a lot younger back then, but that betrayal hit really hard because he had been painting himself as literally holier than thou, and shook his finger to a congressional committee and then barely 2 weeks later failed the test.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...